Explain how sandbags still ruin the game? Yes people still use "sandbags" that don't attack or add value to their team. That is their choice and is a net negative to the team using the bags. Since the new WW matchmaking has been implemented our alliance has stopped using sandbags because it doesn't drop our overall war weight. We just bring the strongest players we can each war.
The new delta calculation and "heating up" streak systems seem to produce many more +/-300 range battles instead of +3 / -800 ridiculous unfair battles where the top 5 players crush the opposing team.
Also, since the assault tactic % dmg reduction has been removed atomic age players can no longer 5* lv 250+ CWA/SA bases. So defense matters again in wars.
My only suggestions would be to add seasons where you can receive a special chest that has buildings, speed ups, national trade goods, stronghold stroops, etc.
This would be similar to the current tug of war reward you get for winning. You get better rewards for competing in more wars, you get better rewards for your alliance being ranked in top 100, top 1000, top 2000 etc.
Also, allowing 2 wars per alliance and increasing alliance limits to 100 members would give greater control over the types of wars players compete in.
An alliance could have a small 10v10 elite player war that is constantly running, requires coalitions and troop tactics. Simultaneously that same alliance could have a more relaxed 30v30 war run once a week that isn't as competitive. The only caveat is the competitive team would want to be highly ranked and the less aggressive players would not care as much. The monthly seasons and rewards could provide a less drawn out grind of trying to stay in the top 100.
The 10, 20, 30, 40 player wars could each have their own bracket and so the competitive half of the alliance could just compete in that one bracket for the duration.
